>> it is, it is fascinating, you know, she is so successful at kind of keeping here's in the limelight and, you know, she's not running to -- i guess she's running to be king maker or she's running to be billionaire, as you said earlier. >> eugene robinson, thank you for joining us, and you're joining us tomorrow in studio for the debate coverage. >> five more minutes she still hasn't announced for president. >> there you go, you can have the last word on our blog online, follow my tweets @lawrence. up next, "the rachel maddow show." >> 20 seconds since then and still no announcement. thanks to you at home for staying with us.

in the decade since 9/11, if you were looking for the single point in which america deviated the most from the way we have always been before, if you were looking for the one point at which washington took the most radical departure from american history and american tradition and american political values, if you were looking for the one point when u.s. policy completely divorced itself from our national interest after 9/11, i would argue that point happened in may 2003, may 2003. when george w. bush had been inaugurated, we had a surplus of more than $100 billion. however torn up bush was, the clinton presidency had left the country in an enviable position, no debt at all within ten years. in that context, the brand new president george w. bush administration passed an enormous new tax cut, $1.3 trillion worth of tax cuts that

essentially undid that budget surplus thing rather fast, but whatever you think about the wisdom in '01, morally and historically, what was important about the '01 tax cuts is they happened before 9/11. george w. bush signed the '01 tax cuts into law in june 2001. when 9/11 happened three months later, of course, america then went to war, we went to war on a global scale and a footing that looked to be rather permanent. never before in american history would they wage a war and cut taxes at the same time. good case to be made that the sober thing to be in 2001, the fiscally responsible thing to do was rescind the brand new tax cuts. you know what america, we need

to change course, we need to rescind the tax cuts because we need the money to pay for the wars. if george w. bush said that at the time, nobody would have blinked. but he didn't. 9/11 happened, we kept the bush tax cuts, we went to war in afghanistan, and we kept the bush tax cuts. we decided then to stay in afghanistan even after the fall of the taliban, we kept the bush tax cuts, then in march 2003, after already being engaged in one war, we decided to start

another war simultaneously in iraq, and not only did we keep those bush tax cuts still then, but then just two months after starting our second war, two months after invading iraq, that single moment in which we divorced ourselves from our history and our reality. >> president bush will sign a more than $300 billion tax cut today. he says it will help boost the economy. >> another round of tax cuts. a second round. this should have been a wait, wait, flashing red lights, bells and whistles, what the heck are we doing sort of moment for the country, a second round of tax cuts. not only fiscally astonishing, but also rather morally astonishing. what kind of country starts a war and cuts taxes but which we would pay for that war at the same time. what kind of country responds to starting a second war by passing a second round of tax cuts. you would think it was a typo about country a, but that is, in fact, what we did. if you look at the factors driving our debt right now, yes,

it is the war themselves, yes, it is the impact of the recession caused by the fiscal crisis, financial crisis, excuse me, of 2008, and some of the recovery and rescue measures put in place by trying to stop a great depression in 2008, but the big kahuna, the big thing, is the bush tax cuts. that's the big deal in the debt and the deficit. those morally catastrophic bush tax cuts. one of the main architects, particularly the 2003 cuts was this gentlemen here, chief economic advisor glenn hubbard. he's known as the guy that brought us the 2003, ignore the two wars, tax cuts. after leaving the white house in 2003, glenn hubbard moved into the private sector. at the time wall street was starting a game of gambling with risk. they were lumping mortgages together, then selling them to each other and making big profits for themselves along the way. the risk any one person would pay back a loan was divorced as risk itself was monitorized and

sold and resold in an increasingly complex but increasingly insane anti-common sense game that drove the housing bubble, of course, and that made wall street very rich. who was one of the great champions of that game? glenn hubbard. hubbard teamed up with chief economists at goldman sachs to write about how wall street's new gain was enhancing the stability of the u.s. banking system. as for the impending threat of economic calamity, according to mr. hubbard, recessions are less frequent now and milder when they occur. so if you're wondering whatever happened to the guy who came up with the post-iraq war fiscal tax plan and wall street risk is fun casino action before the financial collapse, actually enhancing the stability of the financial system, if you're wondering whatever happened to a guy like that, wonder no longer, he has a new gig as the chief

architect of mitt romney's new economic team. mr. romney's new economic plan unveiled today, calls for more tax cuts, he is now running mitt romney's economic team. i don't think the plan, yet, is for starting another iraq war, but hey, keep the tax cuts coming. the reason mitt romney came out with his glenn hubbard jobs plan today is the same reason other republicans are coming out with their jobs plans too, as a pre-response slated for the day after tomorrow. like mitt romney, candidate herman cain also released his jobs plan. he wants corporate tax rates reduced to 9%. not reduced by 9%, but reduced to 9%. newt gingrich will deliver his jobs plan tonight, i believe. that calls for surprise, more tax cuts. jon huntsman released his plan last week and hyped it today, mr. huntsman lamenting the

affect of pride that comes with self sufficiency. which is both true and a little hard to take from the man that's heir to the mcdonald's big mac styrofoam container invention. sometimes it's hard to tell with corporations are people, how far away are we from the chamber of commerce running for president, but they did just release their own jobs plan. the jobs plan, of course, calling for more tax cuts, naturally, also more oil drilling, naturally. but also the chamber of commerce called for increased spending on infrastructure. for all the gridlock on the issue of the economy, could that actually be a way forward? last week when barack obama talked up the idea of infrastructure at the white house, he spoke with a representative of the chamber of

commerce and the head of the aflcio. the part he said was a preview of what he's going to offer on thursday, he shouted out infrastructure specifically, and listen to how he did it. >> on thursday, we're going to lay out a new way forward on jobs to grow the economy and put more americans back to work right now. i don't want to give everything away right here, because i want you all to tune in on thursday -- [ cheers and applause ] but i'll give you just a little bit. we've got roads and bridges across this country that need rebuilding. we've got private companies with the equipment and the manpower to do the building. we've got more than one million unemployed construction workers ready to get dirty right now. there is work to be done, and there are workers ready to do

it. labor's on board, business is on board, we just need congress to get on board. let's put america back to work. >> labor is on board, business is on board. he could have also said that the american public is on board. a pair of new polls out today show that the american people are very much in favor of infrastructure spending right now for job's sake. when asked in a poll commissioned by politico and george washington university if they would support "a large scale federally subsidized nation-wide construction program" americans responded that they like the idea by a 30-point margin, actually. 51% in favor, 21% opposed. in the new nbc news/"wall street journal" poll, when asked how they feel on a road construction bill, 47% said it was a good idea, 27% said it was a bad idea. that's a 21-point margin in the

policy's favor. for all that's not working and self-defeating in washington right now, could we actually get some real jobs help by investing in infrastructure? the president is on board, democrats are on board, labor is on board, business is on board, the american people are on board, republicans? i'm pretty sure they are not on board, but i have to tell you, it is sort of hard to tell. >> 20 years ago, if you want to make a phone call at the airport, you took out a quarter and you went to the pay phone and you put it in the pay phone. today you got these things, all right, you got a smart phone. president obama's strategy is a pay phone strategy and we're in a smart phone world, and so we're going to have to change. what he's doing is taking quarters and stuffing them in the pay phone and can't figure out why it's not working. it's not connected anymore, mr. president. your pay phone strategy does not work in a smart phone world.

>> so the pay phone is still there, it's a pay phone museum? it's a pay phone that is standing but is not hooked -- he's putting the quarters in the -- he's against something, i can tell here, and i think it's about phones, but i don't know. if you are into infrastructure and you think that spending some money on infrastructure might be a good way to get some jobs to get us out of the economic problem we are having here, there's sort of a good news, bad news situation here. apparently the republicans are against, i think, working on infrastructure to get us some jobs, but the good news is that totally inexplicable arcane pay phone metaphors are the best way they have to explain their position. joining us now, bob herbert, contributor to policyshop.net.

i tried to call you earlier, but no matter how much i was putting in the -- >> it wasn't connected. >> it was there still but not on the -- i love the idea what mitt romney was doing 20 years ago was putting quarters in the pay phone. >> exactly. if you believe that one -- we're in a weird place right now. >> do you think in this weird place we're in right now there is a ray of sunshine? >> no, no. i don't think the president is going to propose anything big and bold, which is what we need on thursday night, and even if he did, the republicans would not allow it to pass. i think that what we're watching is the early stages of the presidential campaign, so the president is trying to set the republicans up as the do nothing

congress, take his fight to the people and hope that, you know, it results in a negative reaction to the republicans. the problem is that this is what he should have done, i think, in the first year, year and a half, of his presidency when the republicans were being obstructionists even then, and he should have made the case for a big infrastructure proposal, and then he should have taken that case to the american people, not for political reasons but in hopes of actually getting it passed. >> follow up the big stimulus proposal from his first year, early in his first year, with a separate infrastructure plan. >> absolutely, and get rid of

those tax cuts. this tax cut-mania, you're talking correctly about the republicans, you know, and hubbard and the tax cuts and all that other kind of stuff, but apparently a big portion of the president's proposal thursday night is going to be about tax cuts too. it's not something we need. how can you talk about tax cuts on the one hand again and again and again while ranting on the other hand about the deficits that are allegedly killing the country, according to the politicians, makes no sense at all. >> in terms of what we are hearing about what the president is going to say, reported by the associated press the president is going to propose a package that is a total of about $300 billion, less than $50 billion is spending on infrastructure, more than half of it is an extension on unemployment and an extension of the payroll tax cut, a tax cut but one targeted to people who cash paychecks. >> which you need, you need the unemployment benefits, it does stimulate the economy, but you need it for those suffering from joblessness. >> when you describe something big and bold from the president as something we would need, what would you think of?

>> well, the thing to look at now is that despite all the rhetoric, interest rates are very low, and while we have a long-term debt problem in this country, the big problem in the short to medium-term is employment. we need to get people back to work in order to get the economy moving again, because the problem now is you don't have the demand, and you need to get people on the payroll so they are paying taxes again, and that begins to alleviate some of your deficit problems. it's that point you can pivot, to use a term the obama administration likes to use, you can begin to pivot to deficit reduction, but right now we should be borrowing money at these historically low interest rates to invest in the economy, infrastructure and that sort of thing, to put people back to

work. i also think -- this will never pass in a million years, but i also think we have such an employment crisis in this country that we need direct government job creation to put some people, and especially a lot of young people who are disconnected from the workforce entirely, to put them back to work again to alleviate some of the tremendous suffering out there. >> one of the things back on the table in terms of discussions is a pseudo-version which pays private companies to hire existing -- people who are unemployed now for training purposes, something that was successful, championed by a lot of republican governors. >> right, there was a lot of bipartisan support for that. one of the problems with that and the president's infrastructure proposals to date is that they are too small given the scale of our employment problem. it's not a problem, it's really a crisis. i mean, we really need something huge, but i don't think that it's in the cards, and then towards the latter part of this year, year going to start talking again about deficit reduction, and austerity is

exactly what you don't need right now. i think we're in for hard times for a long time. >> bob herbert, distinguished senior fellow at demos. bob, it's always great to have you here even though you are sometimes doom and gloom. we do get a smile, which i appreciate it. tammy baldwin will be joining us next, and the interview tonight is republican presidential candidate buddy roemer, who has been charming everybody in the building since he's been here tonight. stay tuned.

with the president's big expected jobs speech on thursday and the republican debate tomorrow night, everybody's been

saying it sort of feels like the presidential campaign is starting this week. i don't usually find myself in agreement with the political common wisdom, but in this case, it does feel the presidential campaign is starting this week, and part of the reason it feels that way is because the white house did a couple of things over the last week and a half that felt like they were trying to get out of the way before the start of the actual campaign. as hundreds of people came to protest outside the white house and hundreds of arrests were made, including quite a number of celebrity arrests and arrests of prominent advocates, the obama administration gave a green light to the keystone pipeline designed to stretch from alberta all the way down to texas. and on friday, the administration announced it would not, after all, go through with new anti-smog regulations they had long promised. did these actions by the president any good will from republicans or business

interests that criticize him on stuff like this? no, of course it didn't. still has a heavy hand with regard to regulations, regardless of the fact they are not pursuing regulations they had promised, so the administration didn't appease its critics on the right, and allies are now very unhappy with him. you can't help but think this is the sort of maneuver you want to get done before the campaign starts, because once the campaign does start, you've got to make sure you've got your base and your natural allies on your side and working for you and happy. they should be scared of what happens if they don't support you and enthused about what would happen if they do support you. the obama administration spent the last couple of weeks kicking oil sand in the face of the base. but this week, frankly, they were doing much the opposite. >> if you want to know who

helped lay these quarter stones of an american middle class, you just have to look for the union label. >> the president and i know that labor day is not about a day, it's about a way of life. that's what labor day is about. >> america cannot have a strong, growing economy without a strong, growing middle class and without a strong labor union. >> the middle class would not exist if not for organized labor. >> as long as i'm in the white house, i'm going to stand up for collective bargaining. [ cheers and applause ] >> one of the things that democratic politicians have had a hard time with in this past generation, republicans have not had a hard time, but democrats

have had a hard time, not just aligning themselves with the interest of the democratic's party base, but within the party there is a base and a base that exists not just on election day, a base that wages political fights on behalf of working people, and it's a base that needs support in those fights from powerful democratic politicians. whenever you hear rebuplican politicians saying i'm here with you to fight your fight, that's what they are doing. when vice president biden spoke on labor day yesterday, he spoke in ohio, and in ohio the democratic base has had a real, real fight on its hands this year and the vice president crossed the rubicon in ohio, he named the fight of the democratic base in ohio, he voiced support for their position in the fight and tried to help them win their fight. >> this, ladies and gentlemen, is the fight of your life. across the country from here in ohio to wisconsin to florida,

they are reopening fights we thought we settled 50 years ago. ladies and gentlemen, governors are rolling back collective bargaining rights. they are trying to pass paycheck deception laws, they are pushing the right to work for less again. it's time to turn the tide in wisconsin, pennsylvania, florida, everywhere where basic rights to bargain fairly are under attack, and it seems to me that's exactly what you're doing here in ohio, demanding a referendum on sb-5. stand up now, be counted, repeal these laws the governors have passed, and ladies and gentlemen, vote, vote, vote your values. >> vice president biden in ohio, supporting the repeal of ohio republican's union stripping bill. that bill will be on the ballot for repeal this fall in ohio. the president also name checking the fight against union

stripping in ohio as well as in wisconsin. >> the values at the core of the union movement, those don't change. those are the values that have made this country great. that's what the folks trying to undermine your rights don't understand. we are all in this together. that's why those crowds came out to support you in madison and in columbus. we are one nation. we are one people. we will rise and we will fall together. >> national democrats, the president and the vice president, connecting national politics to these raging fights that have been happening all year long in the states between republicans and the democratic party's base. the democratic party starting to recognize its base, starting to nationalize the fights that base has been fighting all year long without any attention from washington, and that's probably a good thing coast-to-coast. economic populism is not only fun but happens to win elections, but what effect will

nationalizing these fights have on those fights in the states? as you heard from vice president biden, the issue will be on the ballot in november. does it help to have vice president biden talking about it in labor day? in wisconsin we have a much better idea what the fight for that open u.s. senate seat is going to look like. on the republican side, one of the two fitzgerald brothers that run the wisconsin republican legislature, you've heard republican wisconsin being called fitzwalkerstan that year. on the democratic side as of today in order to complete the standoff here, we now know it will be a progressive democrat who has never been afraid to acknowledge the party's base and its fights and who has never been shy who she is.

joining us now, tammy baldwin, democrat of wisconsin, who announced she's running for united states senate for wisconsin. senator baldwin, thank you for your time tonight. >> it's a pleasure to join you tonight, rachel. >> you have been in the middle of the fight against union rights all year. what did you make of the president and vice president bringing it up the way they did in their labor day speeches? >> it was music to my ears. i have been in the front seat witnessing what has happened in the state of wisconsin as progress that this state has made over decades was peeled back, and what happened is that the people of the state decided that if their leaders were not listening to them, they were going to speak out, and it has been incredibly inspiring to me,

but, you know, we've been talking about why this is so important, why collective bargaining rights and the right to organize, but also we're fighting right now, as you've been talking about, for the very survival of the middle class. it used to be that if you worked hard and played by the rules, you could get ahead, and i hear day after day from wisconsin families and individuals who are playing by the rules and are working hard, but they are not getting ahead. people trying to save for their kid's college, people having to dip into their retirement savings just to pay bills when they are just a few years away from retirement. the suffering is real, and the disconnect that we see both in the city of madison at the state capitol and in washington, d.c. is outrageous, and that's why i'm running for the u.s. senate. >> the last election in november 2010 was a very republican election across the country, but it was particularly so in

wisconsin, russ feingold lost his seat, the legislature went completely red, obviously, scott walker was elected governor. why do you, as a democrat, think you'll have a real chance at this senate seat in this next election? >> well, as we've seen as wisconsin has been on the national stage, people want to be heard and they want their leaders fighting for them, and that's not what is happening in madison. it's not what is happening in washington, d.c. i think the voters thought they were getting something different than they did in the midterms last year, but we see wisconsin citizens coming alive, getting involved, and i think that's a sign of what's to come. people need a voice and a fighter in washington. the middle class needs a fighter in washington. we've had great representation from senator herb cole, who has been a champion of the middle class and children and seniors, we need to continue that tradition in wisconsin, and that's why i'm running for the u.s. senate. >> in terms of your decision to get in here, seven terms in the house, why do you think this fight will be better waged by you in the senate than where you are now? >> first of all, i have to say that the honor of being able to represent all of the working

families in the state of wisconsin would be enormous, and i was exploring whether or not i should run for reelection to the house or pursue a senate seat, i had the chance to really travel the state, got a chance to speak with people all over. we're in an epic struggle. this is really, in my mind and many others, about the survival of the middle class. this is about when we look at issues like reducing our debt and that's certainly something we must do, it's about demanding shared sacrifice, not just letting the people who have had the privilege of climbing the ladder of success stand by the wayside, we have to come together to respond to the problems that we face, and i think now is the moment, especially given what's been happening in my state and people reengaging and understanding that they must speak out in order to be heard and understanding that they need a strong voice in the u.s. senate. >> tammy baldwin, democratic congresswoman from wisconsin and now a candidate for u.s. senate in that state. thank you for your time, i appreciate you being with us on this night after you've announced. good luck.

>> thank you so much. okay, so the answer to the question when are you going to have one of the republican presidential candidates on the show is mere moments from now, finally. former louisiana governor buddy roemer will join us for the interview very, very soon. the political aisle is reach acrossable.

20 years and five presidential elections ago, then-vice president dan quayle was running for reelection alongside president george h.w. bush. it didn't work out, the whole reelection thing, but that's not to say dan quayle campaigner won't be famous forever. >> vice president dan quayle has cast a rather strange spell on education in trenton, new jersey, on monday. the vice president gave students a spelling test. >> potato. >> the boy wrote the word correctly, but mr. quayle wasn't satisfied until he added an "e." he was wrong, of course, but claims that was the way it was spelled on the flash card he was using so he went with the potato with an "e" spelling.

wonder how tomato is spelled. >> boy, oh, boy, doesn't that give you confidence? leonard scott with two "t"s is standing by. >> when it's the morning show hosts making fun of you, not david letterman and the late night guys, but the cordial morning show people making fun of you, you know what happened is going on your permanent record. five months later george h.w. bush and dan quayle lost their bid for reelection to bill clinton and al gore, also with an "e" on the end. two decades since misspelling potato, that's all anyone remembers of dan quayle. in his memoir, dan quayle laid the blame on one specific campaign staffer. "what are we supposed to do, i asked the advanced man who prepared this photo op, just sit there and read these words off flash cards and the kids will go up and spell them on the blackboard. has anyone checked the cards? yeah, we looked at them and they

are simple words, no big deal." after telling the 6th grader to put an "e" on the end, he didn't know he did anything wrong. it was after the photo op that a reporter asked mr. quayle how you spell potato. i gave him a puzzled look and the press started laughing. none of the staff people had told me. wow. what happens to campaign staffers who screw up that badly, who essentially end a vice president's career, who end a vice presidency? what happens to a staffer who does something that bad? well, fast forward 20 years, and

that staffer becomes michele bachmann's new presidential campaign manager. michele bachmann's old campaign manager stepped down last night to be replaced by the potato guy. politico.com making the connection between the potato fiasco of 1992. michele bachmann had been known throughout her presidential career as somebody who wasn't exactly looked at more as a loose cannon. she was soon as somebody liable to say anything, potentially strange or shocking things with no warning. it's why she got so much cable news face time in the last few years. michele bachmann's reputation has not been born out by the presidential campaign, by and large, it's been a message discipline campaign, attributed largely to her veteran campaign staff led by this man, ed rollins, why she did so well in

the first major republican debate. now that ed rollins is out as michele bachmann's campaign manager and mr. potato with an "e" is in, will we see the same disciplined candidate, the same disciplined michele bachmann of the very recent past or a version of michele bachmann 1.0, the cable news celebrity michele bachmann we all loved for so many years, or will we get something altogether new? that's question one. the second great question, second great unknown of tomorrow's debate is whether or not the new front-runner, texas governor rick perry will be there. right now governor perry is at home in texas dealing with his state's ongoing wildfire crisis. a staffer telling the news the plan is for him to attend the debate.

the third great unknown for tomorrow night's republican debate is whether or not a republican candidate can still affect the race. are republican primary voters still looking for someone else, as the race is starting to look more than ever as a romney versus perry matchup, does that lead for more room in the field? one of the candidates trying to shake up that field will join us next. my feet are killin' me. well, we're here to get you custom orthotic inserts. we can't afford that. yes, we can. dr. scholl's custom fit orthotic center. foot-care scientists are behind it. ( man ) you have flat feet... no way... way. orthotic 440 is recommended. it recommends the custom-fit orthotic insert that's best for your feet. you'll get all-day relief. for your tired, achy feet. and you could save a couple hundred bucks. sweet. this is great. dr. scholl's custom fit orthotic center. thank you... who are you talking to ? for locations, see drscholls.com.

i have been so looking forward to this, joining us

tonight for the interview, republican presidential candidate and former golfer of louisiana, buddy roemer, he's not one of the candidates expected to be on stage tomorrow night, but we are very happy to have him with us on this stage tonight. governor, i can't tell you how happy i am to have you here. >> me too, i'm honored to be here. >> i want to ask you the big obvious question. tell me if you think it's rude and don't want to answer. jon huntsman is polling at 1%, 1%, 1% when he's lucky. how did he get this blessing as a candidate to be taken seriously as a contender with numbers like that and you did not get that same blessing? >> i had the same number, slightly better, 1% and 2% over the last two weeks. i don't know the answer. my suspicion is it might have to do with money and my approach to it. i could be wrong, rachel. i've been out of politics for 20 years. i've been a happy man in

louisiana building a small bank about $1 billion worth. we help jobs get created out in the real world, that's what i do, i'm a jobs guy, not a lawyer, not a politician, but i'm the only guy running who was a congressman and a governor, and i know this business, and i'm concerned about america, so i entered four weeks ago. i have slowly crept up to my 1% and 2%. i will add to that over time, but here's my difference, $100 limit, no pac money, no super pac money, and i fully disclose every penny that i collect. i've had all 50 states participate, guam and puerto rico, i don't know what's wrong with those guys, but they are helping me, so i am building, i will get on a debate, rachel. it will happen. my issues are jobs and the corruptive power of big money in campaigns. those are my two issues. no one else talks about it, no one else cares about it. i want a president with passion about jobs, and that's what i expect from mr. obama the day after tomorrow. that's what i'm looking for.

not a specific plan, but i want passion for jobs. this country's in trouble. i don't see it in the republican party, i don't see it in the presidency, i'm concerned, that's why i'm running. >> after 20 years or so out of politics, why jump in at the presidential level, why try to get back into politics without national name recognition, without a national base? >> that's a good question, and i never really thought of it that way, and maybe the game passed me by. it used to be i built my political career, and i served in the constitutional convention, i wrote a constitution with the help of others, congress for four terms, and governor. that i would build it slowly over time on the issues. i'm an issues wong, i like it, i like how to improve the country.

i have found since i've come back in the last couple of months, and i've been doing this for about seven months, exploratory, and now running, that the pace has picked up. i like that, i'm getting up to speed in that, but it's so television oriented. rachel, i won the governor's race in louisiana with no pac money, with a limit, i spent $1 million, the guy that i beat spend $16 million, but i did it with newspaper support, newspapers were so important then. they are less important now, so i'm learning kind of the new game, and that's why i've slowly begun to build. i'm in new hampshire, i rest my case in new hampshire, it's like i'm running for governor there. my limited funds will also be spent there. if i can get one million people to give me $10, i'll spend it in new hampshire, we'll win the republican nomination and revolutionize politics in this country. it's all about the money, it's about the big checks and special

interests, rachel, and it's democrat and republican. i see no difference. >> and on the issue of campaign finance, we have seen a gradual change over the course of a generation until the last couple of years where that gradual change has gone off a cliff, five supreme court decisions that have dismantled the meager finance laws that we had. are you, and is anybody, structurally incapable of making a campaign finance case at the national level, because by definition, you can't raise the money to make the case against big money. >> we'll see. it's a dilemma. i mean, i would have a rule that lobbyists registered with the federal government could not give a check to a candidate. i would have a rule that you'd have a 48-hour reporting period,

not 90 or 150 days, rachel. let's know where the money's coming from. i would have a rule that pac could have a limit. i would have a rule that there's no more super pacs. there would be criminal penalties for violation of these rules. that does not advocate the close supreme court vote 5-4 that money is speech. as a conservative i believe money is speech. but you can't yell fire in a crowded theater incorrectly. there can be broad limits and i think the supreme court has said it. one final point. conservatives like myself have argued for full disclosure. liberals like yourself often argue for limits on giving. right now we have neither. we have the worst of both worlds. we have mitt romney taking a million dollar check in a super pac and not disclosing it to anybody until forced to. we have campaign chiefs of staff

in mr. obama's case and in several other candidate's case, who are running the so-called independent pacs. i mean, is -- it is morally wrong in my mind and hurtful to the american politics. okay, if we have no limits, let's have full disclosure. now we have neither. >> i would say, sir, that whether or not you have a chance of winning the nomination, the fact that you are running has you on places like "the daily show" and this show and other shows across the country talking about this and embarrassing everyone else. for that i thank you. >> i'm a proud republican but i'm a prouder american. this is about america. something's wrong in our system, it's special interest money. fair trade with china, that's something i'd like to talk about. he ought to protect american jobs. >> will you come back during this campaign?

>> absolutely. it's great to have you here. >> we will be right back. import. when i got my medicare card, i realized i needed an aarp... medicare supplement insurance card, too. medicare is one of the great things about turning 65, but it doesn't cover everything. in fact, it only pays up to 80% of your part b expenses. if you're already on or eligible for medicare, call now to find out how an aarp... medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company, helps cover some of the medical expenses... not paid by medicare part b. that can save you from paying up to thousands of dollars... out of your own pocket. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans... exclusively endorsed by aarp. when you call now, you'll get this free information kit... with all you need to enroll. put their trust in aarp medicare supplement insurance. plus you'll get this free guide to understanding medicare. the prices are competitive. i can keep my own doctor.

and i don't need a referral to see a specialist. call now to get a free information kit. plus you'll get this free guide to understanding medicare. and the advantages don't end there. choose from a range of medicare supplement plans... that are all competitively priced. we have a plan for almost everyone, so you can find one that fits your needs and budget. with all medicare supplement plans, there are virtually no claim forms to fill out. plus you can keep your own doctor and hospital that accepts medicare. and best of all, these plans are... the only medicare supplement plans endorsed by aarp. when they told me these plans were endorsed by aarp... i had only one thing to say... sign me up. call the number on your screen now... and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan. you'll get this free information kit... and guide to understanding medicare, to help you choose the plan that's right for you. as with all medicare supplement plans, you can keep your own doctor and hospital that accepts medicare, get help paying for what medicare doesn't...

and save up to thousands of dollars. call this toll-free number now. wait a second... with olay challenge that. new regenerist wrinkle revolution... relaxes the look of wrinkles instantly, and the look of deep wrinkles in 14 days. ready, set, smooth... regenerist. from olay.

late last night a very interesting convoy of cars was seen leaving the nation of

libya, crossing the border into niger. first it was a couple vehicles then a dozen pickup trucks. then fewer than ten vehicles carrying people loyal to moammar gadhafi. as far as u.s. national security officials say they can tell, neither gadhafi himself nor any gadhafi family member was part of that very interesting convoy. niger's prime minister has said the same thing. a libyan official says gadhafi was last tracked toward the niger border three days ago. why would he be heading there? it's possible it's not his final decision. burkina faso offered asylum to moammar gadhafi. libya is already starting to act as a de facto post gadhafi country.

this one works. ooh, the price sure doesn't. i'm tired of shopping around. [ sigh ] too bad you're not buying car insurance. like that's easy. oh, it is. progressive direct showed me their rates and the rates of their competitors. i saved hundreds when switching. we could use hundreds. yeah. wake up and smell the savings. out there with a better way.